UK defence – are aspirations matching the reality?

Key UK defence strategies need to be updated

The Integrated Review and the Defence Command Paper, published by the Government in March 2021, attempted to anticipate the threats and challenges the United Kingdom may face in the next decade.

The ambition of the Integrated Review was to outline the Government’s vision for Global Britain and the UK’s role in the world following its withdrawal from the European Union.

The Defence Command Paper’s role was to outline defence’s contribution to this overall vision.

In our view, neither document gave a sense of priorities, and since their publication the strategic assumptions that underpinned them have changed.

The momentous events of 2022, particularly Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the deterioration of the economic environment, pose serious challenges to the scope and extent of the UK’s defence policy.

We therefore considered it appropriate to review the current policy, and in particular to assess whether the two key strategic documents which underpin it remain accurate and relevant.

Our report acknowledges the Government’s announcement that it will update both strategy documents but urges it to heed the Committee’s recommendations which address significant issues including a lack of clarity and purpose in the original Integrated Review.

We call on the Government to set out its assessment of the developments of the last 21 months and provide a clear explanation, both of its defence priorities and how it plans to translate the aspirational language of the previous reviews into practice.

We urge action in five priority areas.

1. Impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

There is no room for complacency about the threat Russia poses to the UK, especially considering its attack on Ukraine and recent aggressive nuclear rhetoric.

The outcome of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine remains uncertain. Although it is premature to draw any conclusive lessons at this stage, the conflict has served to spotlight the high attrition rates of equipment and weapons stock.

The Government must remain vigilant in the face of threats from Russia and should set out its assessment of current Russian strengths and weaknesses.
It must also set out its plans to replenish the equipment it has donated to Ukraine and how it will build greater resilience into its own stocks and supply chains as a matter of urgency.

2. Impact of the changing economic environment

Current high inflation and foreign exchange rates are likely to have an adverse effect on the defence budget. It is therefore not clear whether the Government can deliver the aspirations in the Integrated Review or Defence Command Paper unless further resources are made available.

We recognise that any commitment to the level of allocation to the defence budget remains subject to Treasury-led decisions on spending.

The Government must set out its assessment of the impact of the changing economic environment on what the Defence Secretary called the “planned marker” of raising defence expenditure to 3% of GDP by 2030; and update the Committee on the impact of inflation on defence spending.

3. The China Challenge

Our January 2021 report on the UK – China relationship concluded that the Integrated Review’s classification of China as both a “systemic competitor” and an “important partner” was ambiguous and demonstrated the lack of a coherent strategy towards China.

As the Government updates the Integrated Review, it must consider carefully whether the “competitor” framing is still appropriate or whether China should be reclassified as a “threat”, particularly in the light of China’s increasingly aggressive posture towards Taiwan and its partnership with Russia.

Our report on China also urged the Government to rectify Taiwan’s omission from the Integrated Review. We urge the Government to clarify its policy regarding Taiwan and also revisit the low-level emphasis placed on the Middle East.

4. Procurement and new technologies

Investment in Research and Development (R&D) requires long-term planning and consistency in terms of priorities and funding. The level of R&D defence funding may be insufficient to meet the ambition of ‘sustaining strategic advantage through science and technology’.

We were also disappointed to hear evidence from a representative of one of the new technology start-ups that in terms of procurement the Ministry of Defence could at times be considered “one of the worst customers in the world”.

The Government must address the risk of the so-called ‘Valley of Death’ and we call on the Government to ensure that the implementation of the objectives as outlined in its strategic documents will address the bureaucratic obstacles faced by the defence industry and improve the procurement process.

5. Parliamentary scrutiny

One of the main challenges for Parliamentary scrutiny is a lack of clarity on significant aspects of defence policy spending. The Government is too often reluctant to admit the scale of expenditure by citing security concerns.

We believe that all aspects of public spending should be scrutinised by Parliament. We call on the Government to consider allowing Parliamentary Committees responsible for scrutiny of the UK’s defence policy to access (on a confidential basis) information about how funds are allocated and spent on, for example, the nuclear deterrent.

Find out more

We have made our recommendations to the Government and it has two months to respond to our report.

Read the full report on our website.

Find out more about our inquiry and our committee.

Follow us on Twitter @LordsIRCom

Cover image credit: Stuart Hill © Crown Copyright (via UK MOD)